The viper was never relevant anyway, it could not sell even 10% the copies its vastly superior rival, the Corvette, is selling every month. it was a silly design, to take a truck engine and put it in a 80k car that does not even have a decent A/C.

The Corvette is not as perfectly polished as a Porsche 911 or a Ferrari either, but at 1/2 to 1/4 of their price it is sure a supercar bargain.

adb
Posted: 3/31/2008 4:17pm PDT

No big surprise. The agreement said the Conner plant would build the Viper 'through its life cycle'--which, really, can't be more than a couple of more years. Once the current Viper dies, the plant does as well, unless Chrysler can find another manufacturing source. Magna, anyone?

jon
Posted: 3/31/2008 11:13pm PDT

lower output will = higher profitability...
This car cost $ and does not make any profit

let it go and use the extra money to float another line

Mark
Posted: 4/1/2008 10:37am PDT

So..... in the article it says.... "Dodge will get to rule the roost on trucks and utility vehicles, with Chrysler taking on passenger cars and Jeep, the SUV lineup. That leaves the Viper out in the cold with the new regime" So.... as impressive as the story and the car that the Viper is, I can see why it makes sense to give it the ax. Viper is not making a profit. It used to be the halo car for Dodge, but the Charger and Challenger have stolen the limelight and reasonably so.... in addition to their affordability.

However... shouldn't this be more of a story than just killing off the Viper??? If Dodge becomes more of a truck/utility manufacture, then... the Charger and Challenger will go away as well. Right? Or will they build the Charger to become more like a truck or SUV. Ramcharger, perhaps? Hmmmm... although... they've put 4 doors on the Charger and it's been pretty successful, so perhaps calling the Charger a Chrysler will stick as well?? Chrysler will be building the passenger car segment, right?
Chrysler Charger. EEK!! BLAH!!